Literature DB >> 20349271

Phenotypic characterization and risk factors for interval breast cancers in a population-based breast cancer screening program in Barcelona, Spain.

Laia Domingo1, Maria Sala, Sònia Servitja, Josep Maria Corominas, Francisco Ferrer, Juan Martínez, Francesc Macià, Maria Jesús Quintana, Joan Albanell, Xavier Castells.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To analyze phenotypic classification and other risk factors for interval breast cancer, focusing on true interval and false negative cancers.
METHODS: A nested case-control study was performed among 115 cancers detected between two screening mammograms (interval cancers) and 115 screen-detected cancers diagnosed between 1995 and 2008 in a population-based breast cancer screening program in Barcelona (Spain). Bivariate and multivariate analyses were performed to compare patient and tumor molecular characteristics among all interval cancers, true intervals and false negatives, and screen-detected cancers.
RESULTS: A total of 42.5% of interval cancers were true interval tumors and 16.2% were false negatives. High breast density and triple negative phenotype were more frequent in true interval cancers than in screen-detected cancers (57.6 and 34.1%, respectively for breast density, p = 0.023; 28.1 and 7.5%, respectively for triple negative phenotype, p = 0.028), while no statistically significant differences were observed between false negatives and screen-detected cancers. The main adjusted factors associated with true interval cancers compared with screen-detected cancers were high breast density and triple negative phenotype (OR = 3.1, 95% CI, 1.03-9.24 and OR = 8.9, 95% CI, 2.03-38.62, respectively).
CONCLUSION: A more aggressive molecular phenotype and high breast density were identified in breast tumors that truly arise in the interval between screenings.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20349271     DOI: 10.1007/s10552-010-9541-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Causes Control        ISSN: 0957-5243            Impact factor:   2.506


  22 in total

1.  Differences between screen-detected and interval breast cancers among BRCA mutation carriers.

Authors:  Melissa Pilewskie; Emily C Zabor; Elizabeth Gilbert; Michelle Stempel; Oriana Petruolo; Debra Mangino; Mark Robson; Maxine S Jochelson
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2019-01-23       Impact factor: 4.872

2.  Breast cancer risk factors by mode of detection among screened women in the Cancer Prevention Study-II.

Authors:  Mia M Gaudet; Emily Deubler; W Ryan Diver; Samantha Puvanesarajah; Alpa V Patel; Ted Gansler; Mark E Sherman; Susan M Gapstur
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2021-01-04       Impact factor: 4.872

3.  Differential expression of prognostic biomarkers between interval and screen-detected breast cancers: does age or family history matter?

Authors:  Jan T Lowery; Tim Byers; John Kittelson; John E Hokanson; Judy Mouchawar; John Lewin; Dan Merrick; Lisa Hines; Meenakshi Singh
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2011-03-24       Impact factor: 4.872

4.  Differences in Breast Cancer Characteristics by Mammography Screening Participation or Non-Participation.

Authors:  Bettina Braun; Laura Khil; Joke Tio; Barbara Krause-Bergmann; Andrea Fuhs; Oliver Heidinger; Hans-Werner Hense
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2018-08-06       Impact factor: 5.594

5.  Biological characteristics of interval cancers: a role for biomarkers in the breast cancer screening.

Authors:  A Caldarella; D Puliti; E Crocetti; S Bianchi; V Vezzosi; P Apicella; M Biancalani; A Giannini; C Urso; F Zolfanelli; E Paci
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-09-09       Impact factor: 4.553

6.  Screening outcome in women repeatedly recalled for the same mammographic abnormality before, during and after the transition from screen-film to full-field digital screening mammography.

Authors:  Rob van Bommel; Adri C Voogd; Marieke W Louwman; Luc J Strobbe; Dick Venderink; Lucien E M Duijm
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2016-05-14       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Mammographic breast density and subsequent risk of breast cancer in postmenopausal women according to the time since the mammogram.

Authors:  Lusine Yaghjyan; Graham A Colditz; Bernard Rosner; Rulla M Tamimi
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2013-04-19       Impact factor: 4.254

8.  Prognosis in women with interval breast cancer: population based observational cohort study.

Authors:  Mette Kalager; Rulla M Tamimi; Michael Bretthauer; Hans-Olov Adami
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2012-11-16

9.  Tumor phenotype and breast density in distinct categories of interval cancer: results of population-based mammography screening in Spain.

Authors:  Laia Domingo; Dolores Salas; Raquel Zubizarreta; Marisa Baré; Garbiñe Sarriugarte; Teresa Barata; Josefa Ibáñez; Jordi Blanch; Montserrat Puig-Vives; Ana Fernández; Xavier Castells; Maria Sala
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2014-01-10       Impact factor: 6.466

10.  Cost-effectiveness and harm-benefit analyses of risk-based screening strategies for breast cancer.

Authors:  Ester Vilaprinyo; Carles Forné; Misericordia Carles; Maria Sala; Roger Pla; Xavier Castells; Laia Domingo; Montserrat Rue
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-02-03       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.